Allahabad High Court
Ashok Kumar Jain And Another vs District Inspector Of Schools Baghpat ... on 12 May, 2026
Author: Saurabh Shyam Shamshery
Bench: Saurabh Shyam Shamshery
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
Neutral Citation No. - 2026:AHC:110036
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 28397 of 2001
Ashok Kumar Jain And Another
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
District Inspector Of Schools Baghpat And Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s)
:
Rahul Jain
Counsel for Respondent(s)
:
A.K.Goyal, C.S.C.
Court No. - 32
HON'BLE SAURABH SHYAM SHAMSHERY, J.
1. Heard Sri Rahul Jain, learned counsel for petitioners and Sri Ritesh Upadhyay, Advocate holding brief of Sri A.K. Goyal, learned counsel for Respondent-2.
2. Petitioners were admittedly appointed on short term basis, however, their appointments were disapproved by District Inspector of Schools, Meerut, therefore, they have approached this Court by way of filing Writ Petition No. 17421 of 1998, which was disposed of with a direction to consider the case of petitioners.
3. In pursuance of above order, petitioners? case was considered by Deputy Director of Education (Secondary), however, their representation was rejected vide an order dated 28.04.2001 and the reasons assigned therein are reproduced hereinafter:
"???????
?????? ?? ???????? ???? ?? ????? ????? ??? ?????? ?? ???? ?? ?????? ???? ???? ?? ??????? ??? ????? ?????? ??? ?? ?????? ????
?- ??????????? ?????? ??????? ???? ????? ??????? ?? ??????? ???????? ?????? ?? ???? ???? ???? ???
?- ?????? ?? ????? ??????????? ?? ???? ???? ???????? ???????? ?? ?????? ???? ?? ??? ??, ?????? ?? ???????? ?? ?????? ?????? ?????? ???? ????? ?????? ???? ??? ? ????????? ??? ?? ?? ??????? ????? ?????? ???? ??? ????? ??? ?? ?? ???????? ???? ??? ?? ???? ??? ???? ???
?- ???? ????? ?????? ??? ??? ???? ??? ??? ??????? ?? ????? ??????? ??? ??????? ??? ?? ???? ?? ????? ??????? ????? ????? ??????? ??? ?? ??????????? ??????? ??? ?? ?? ?? ???????? ??? ???? ???? ????? ???????? ?????? ??? ??????? ???? ???? ???? ???????????? ?? ?? ?????????? ??????????? ?? ??? ??????? ???? ??? ???? ?????? ???? ?? ?? ?? ??????????? ??? ????????? ?? ????? ??? ??? ?????? ??? ?? ?? ???????? ??? ?? ?? ???? ????
?- ???????? ?? ???????????? ?? ???? ??? ???????? ??? ???? ??????? ???????????? ?? ???????? ??? ?? ??????????? ??????? ??? ???? ?? ??????????? ?? ???? ??? ????????? ????? ????? ??? ???
?- ???? ?? ?????? ?? ??? ??????????? ??????? ?????? ?????? ???? ??? ?? ???? ???????? ???????? (???????) ???? ?????? ???????? ??? ?????? ???? ???? ????? ?????? ??? ?????? ?? ??????? ???? ?? ??????? ?? ?? ??????? ??????????? ???????? ?? ???? ???? ?????? ???? ?? ?? ?????? ???????? ?? ?????? ???????? ?????? ??? ????? ?????? ??? ?????? ?? ?????? ?? ???????? ???? ???? ?? ??????????? ?? ??? ???????? ???? ???
?- ???????????? ?? ??????? ??? ??? ???????? ???????? ?? ?????? ???????? ????? ????? ?????? ???????????? ?? ??????? ?? ???? ?? ???? ?? ???????? ????? ?? ???????? ????? ?? ??? ???? ???? ???? ?? ?????? ?? ?? ???????? ?? ? ???????? ???? ???? ?? ?? ????? ?? ??????????? ????? ??????? ??????? ?? ??? ?? ????? ???? ???? ????? ???? ???
??????? ?????? ?? ?????? ???? ?? ?? ???? ????? ??????????? ??????? ?? ??? ???? ??? ????????? ?????? ?? ???????? ?? ???????? ? ???? ???? ???????? ???????? ?????? ??????? ?? ?????? ??? ????? ?? ?????? ?? ?? ??? ???
??????
????? ??? ?????? ?? ????? ??? ???????? ?? ??????? ???? ?? ??????? ?? ???????? ?? ?????? ??? ?? ???? ???? ????? ??? ??? ??????? ????? ??? ?????? ??????? ??? ?? ???? ??? ???????????, ?????? ??-??-???? ?????? ???? ???? ??? ??????? ??? ????? ?????, ???? ?? ?????? ???????? ????? ??? ?? ??? ????? ????? ??????????? ??????? ??? ???? ???? ?? ???? ?????? ?? ???? ???? ?? ???? ??????????? ?? ????? ????? ?????? ???? ?????? ???? ???? ?? ?????"
4. Aforesaid order is under challenged before this Court. No interim order was granted and writ petition remained pending for about 25 years.
5. Learned counsel for petitioners submits that the reasons assigned in impugned order are legally unsustainable and provisions of U.P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 were applicable in present case. There is no specific bar that Officiating Principal cannot make appointments. The Institution in question, being a Minority Institution, there was no requirement of prior approval from District Inspector of Schools as well as that outcome of inspection report that there was no requirement of any Teacher, was perverse.
6. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for respondent submits that since petitioners were not granted any interim order and now Primary Section of Institution concerned is closed, therefore, impugned order may not be interfered.
7. Learned counsel for petitioner further submits that in case this Court dismisses this writ petition on merit, petitioners? respective claim of salary on basis of statement made by Principal of Institution that they have worked till 04.07.2000 be settled.
8. Learned counsel for respondent has disputed that petitioners have worked for aforesaid period.
9. I have considered aforesaid submissions and perused the material on record.
10. Impugned order is passed by Deputy Director of Education (Secondary) wherein reasons have been assigned which also include that due process for appointment was not followed, which is not effectively denied by learned counsel for petitioner. There may not be a specific bar that Officiating Principal cannot make appointments but there must be a consideration that in given circumstances it was necessary to do so. However, such consideration is not on record. Reason for short term vacancy was also found incorrect that two Teachers were on leave, whereas they left the College and never return back. The above reason remain uncontroverted.
11. The Court also takes note that now the Primary Section of Institution is also closed, a fact which is also not substantially denied, therefore, after a period of more than 25 years a direction cannot be passed that petitioners be allowed to rejoin. Therefore, there is no illegality in impugned order.
12. Now the only question remains is with regard to unpaid salary, if any, to petitioners. For that petitioners are at liberty to approach the concerned respondent, who may look into the matter after verifying, whether petitioners have worked or not, for purpose of payment of salary they claimed.
13. The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
(Saurabh Shyam Shamshery,J.) May 12, 2026 AK